Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » let's discuss new Draw principles and problems...
Re: let's discuss new Draw principles and problems... [message #1022 is a reply to message #1021] Tue, 14 February 2006 10:59 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
fudadmin is currently offline  fudadmin
Messages: 1321
Registered: November 2005
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania
Ultimate Contributor
Administrator
luzr wrote on Tue, 14 February 2006 03:35

To reduce required bandwith?


to fool the eye and speed up.

Quote:


Well, interesting idea, but I doubt visual artifacts would be acceptable.


what exactly? I think opposite! It would give nice and smooth rendering. Solar OS use it as main one. And I guess even more applications... I suspect even Opera's menus ...

Quote:


Frankly, what is bad about this:

- use basic Draw for most parts that do not require advanced rendering (e.g. editor in TheIDE)



Why then do we need the new draw at all? Or let's make separate modules? Maybe we need a structured list with all the requirements?

Quote:


- use client-side, double-buffered extended Draw (perhaps AGG based) for intensive graphical tasks



I expect multi-buffered with "dirty" rectangles and/or regions...
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message icon14.gif
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Task: WinCE build environment
Next Topic: Should we double-buffer by default?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Jun 09 12:00:16 CEST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.05089 seconds